Constitutional lawyer and law lecturer, Justice Srem Sai, has said President Akufo-Addo’s decision to act on the Anti-LGBTQ bill after the Supreme Court’s decision indicates his lack of firm stance on the matter.
After observing the letter’s wording and content, Justice Sai says he gets the impression that the President is little unsure of the precise justification for not assenting to the Human Sexual Rights and Ghanaian Family Values Bill 2021, otherwise known as the Anti-LGBTQ/Gay Bill.
“Now, I think the choice of words led to some level of frustration on the part of the President. You could see from the language and everything that the letter contains, that the President seems to be under severe pressure. He seems to be frustrated with developments of events and he seems to be confused a bit about what exactly he should give as a reason for not, you know, including his assent to thunder severe pressure bill.
“Now, let’s just be clear. The President has made known his position on the bill itself. He has not indicated whether he would accept the bill or he would not accept the bill,” he said on News Central Tuesday, March 19, 2024 on TV3.
His comment follows a letter from the Executive Secretary to the President, Nana Bediatuo Asante, to the Clerk of Parliament, ordering him to desist from transmitting the bill to the Presidency for Executive assent.
The Office of the President, pending two Supreme Court applications, asked the House of Parliament to refrain from submitting the Anti-LGBTQ/Gay bill to the Presidency for assent.
The order followed an allegation from the Presidency that Parliament attempted submitting the Bill to the Office for the President to sign.
The Presidency says until the reliefs in the two matters are interpreted by the apex court, the President cannot take a decision on the bill.
The applications seek to prevent Parliament from sending the Bill to the President and to restrain the President from signifying his assent to it, pending the final determination of the matter.
In a statement issued by the Secretary to Parliament Monday, March 18, 2024, Nana Bediatuo Asante, indicated that, Parliament was aware of the two applications since it was served in both instances, and submitting the document for approval or otherwise was not appropriate.
“It is the understanding of this Office that both applications have also been duly served on Parliament. Therefore, it would be improper for you to transmit the Bill to the President and equally improper for this Office to receive the Bill until the Supreme Court determines the matters raised in the suits,” the statement said in some parts.
It added that the Attorney-General also advised the President not to take any action concerning the Bill until the issues raised by the suits are resolved by the Supreme Court.
The Office further stated that it is established law that during the pendency of an interlocutory injunction application, the status quo ante should be maintained, and no action should be taken that could prejudice the injunctive relief sought and undermine the authority of the court.
“In the circumstances, you are kindly requested to cease and desist from transmitting the Bill to the President until the matters before the Supreme Court are resolved,” it added.
By Jazmin Asumadu
